Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

Brazen violation

The handcuffing of B.V. Seetaram, a senior journalist, by the Karnataka police, that too in a defamation case, is in brazen violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court and reiterated by it in the Citizens for Democracy case (1995) 3 SCC 743. A person should not be handcuffed unless he is a dangerous criminal and there are chances of his escape. Mr. Seetaram, ironically, wanted to be in custody fearing attack by the Sangh Parivar.

The Supreme Court has laid down that a violation of its guidelines will invite contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act. One would only wish that contempt proceedings are initiated against the Karnataka police to remind them that they are also subject to the rule of law.

N.G.R. Prasad,

Chennai

The report that Mr. Seetaram, a senior journalist and publisher of a popular daily, was brought to court in handcuffs in connection with a defamation case is shocking. Mr. Seetaram is not a hardcore criminal to escape from custody.

The Karnataka police, who handcuffed Mr. Seetaram despite the Supreme Court’s directions on the subject, owe an explanation to the people and the media.

B. Harish,

Mangalore

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Science education for tomorrow
Corporate support for biodiversity
The thunder of the third Intifada
Year of Olympic triumph and crises for China
Emerging ethnic Indian communities
More than goodwill needed to save biosphere
Corrections and clarifications
Kilinochchi and after
Voices of reason
Pakistan’s dilemma
Brazen violation

Copyright © 2009, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu